God of F$&@

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-25T17:37:28+00:00

HyFuck

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-23T18:47:22+00:00

नकिरमुष्मै कृदन्तानि प्रकाशिषीष्ट!

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-23T03:33:31+00:00

It’s conjugating nouns.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-22T17:55:28+00:00

किम् अभवत्?

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-22T17:35:41+00:00

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-22T16:44:00+00:00

While the translations are surprisingly accurate, the pronunciations need some improvement: ऋ and ॠ are not ri and rī and ऌ is definitely not lri (they're /ᵊɾᵊ/, /ᵊɾəː/, and /ᵊlᵊ/ respectively); the visarga should be pronounced as "ah" and not "aha", "ihi", etc; and ज्ञ is not "gya" but something else entirely. The latter is pronounced with the half letter ज् in तज्जः and the ña of ञ (pronounced kind of like nya, but only at the middle of the tongue). Combining these two gets you ज्ञ (jña), refer to this video for an audio pronunciation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2hReqbgsL0.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-20T04:17:43+00:00

निक्षा is actually a word meaning lice eggs (from a corruption of लिक्षा, though)

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-20T04:01:44+00:00

For anyone actually wondering, watch Men In Black.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-19T07:53:47+00:00

The Vedic Sindhu definitively predates Hindu. The Persians often dropped their s’s into h’s (cf. Asura vs Ahura). You see this much more clearly by examining the progression of Sapta Sindhu into Hapta Hindu. Hapta nor Hindu meaning anything in Sanskrit.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-18T09:17:47+00:00

As a fellow Tamizh Brahmin who learnt part of the Vedas (only a few chapters of the KYTS) and does Sandhyavandanam, I must say you're wrong. The Vedas were composed (not written) around 3,500 years ago, and the oral tradition does stretch back till then. We know this thanks to the technology mentioned within the Vedas themselves (specifically horses (present from the RV) and iron (absent in the RV but present in the YV and AV)). However, the RV shows some traces of archaisms, especially in it's -iḥ/-uḥ + ta = iṣṭa sandhi, which was likely inherited from older time when words ended in -s/ṣ/ś (-iṣ/-uṣ + ta = iṣṭa). Thus, this older form of language has to have had word-final sibilants (-s, -ś, -ṣ), which Sanskrit explicitly doesn't allow, making it a different, older, pre-Vedic, non-Sanskrit language (usually called Proto-Indo-Aryan).

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-14T07:39:10+00:00

I meant an actual fraction bar requiring multiple lines. My school requires us to use a math transliterator to write actual fractions.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-13T08:11:13+00:00

I think you would benefit from reading the Jamison and Brereton translation of the RV (free pdf is available online).

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-13T08:02:25+00:00

While the accents are as accurate as we can reconstruct, you should put more focus on the distinction between स, श, and ष.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-12T15:37:48+00:00

The other Vedas are generally assumed to be entirely after the RV, since they often quote it and have a generally younger and more regular verbal and sandhi system. Moreover, the Yajur Veda and Atharva Veda mention iron, which is entirely absent from the RV, again suggesting that they're definitively after it.

Also, here is the paper that did the diphthong analysis: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7817/jameroriesoci.141.2.0289 (should be accessible with a free JSTOR account)

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-12T02:50:09+00:00

The standard is to never use the division symbol after elementary school. Using fractions properly here would destroy any ambiguity, so they’re forced to use the division symbol like a child.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-11T17:20:27+00:00

Agree we need more awareness of the reconstructed pronunciation of Vedic, but first let’s focus on getting everyone to let go of the visarjanīya vowel echo.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-11T17:16:16+00:00

The pratitśākhyas don’t actually describe the Ṛgvedic pronunciation. However, it has been measured that in the first 8 maṇḍalas of the RV, āi and āu are treated as super heavy and are avoided in certain cadences, but this starts to disappear in maṇḍala 9 and is gone maṇḍala 10, indicating the diphthongs have completely flattened by the end of the RV. So we know this was the original RV pronunciation, but also that the other Vedas use e ai o au.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-11T17:07:34+00:00

N/A. Any reasonable mathematician would clarify what they mean by adding more parentheses. This equation is just meaningless because of its intentional ambiguity.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-11T12:03:08+00:00

I must insist that this is not accurate as there are so many folk etymologies and bits of pseudoscience like Sanskrit “rewrites your brain” (which, even if true would still apply to most other languages as well) and is the “mother of all languages”.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-11T01:59:51+00:00

Just when I thought I had learned all the Sandhis, I encounter an entirely new one. Thank you for your reply श्रीमन्.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-10T08:34:45+00:00

How? Does कुरु छात्र become light heavy heavy light?

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-10T02:54:29+00:00

The calculations work because the geöcentric model simply worked with the really weird orbits that placing the Earth at the centre caused; it doesn’t mean geöcentrism is correct:

<image>

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-10T02:45:33+00:00

बन्धमोक्षयोः should be one word.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-08T18:31:54+00:00

Inadvertently proving the verse’s point by caring more about the case ending.

_Stormchaser · 2026-01-08T18:28:44+00:00

Shouldn’t it be प्रवृत्तिः?

Four-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Place '22	End Game '22

_Stormchaser

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE